Libraries and Banning
Bans and Not Bans
In a recent column, Isaac Bailey complained that his book, Why Didn’t We Riot?: A Black Man in Trumpland, had been removed from the Naval Academy library. He argued that it was among the books “banned” as part of the administration’s effort to remove DEI and critical race theory as significant parts of the curriculum at the service academies.
It seems that removal and reinstatement are becoming a habit for the Defense Department as part of moving its focus away from DEI and Critical Race Theory. In a previous column, I covered the case where a website about Jackie Robinson had been temporarily unreachable. The service academies are returning some books that have been removed from their libraries for the same reason.
Recruiting difficulties were severe under the previous administration partly because the focus changed from getting the best people to having the “correct mix” of people in group photographs. Young people knew it was dangerous to go into battle with that mix of people.
I don’t know if Bailey’s book has been returned to the shelves, but I’d like to consider his use of the word “banned.” There are, of course, legitimate concerns about banning.
Middle and high school libraries become embroiled in controversy over books involving words now considered inappropriate or concepts considered too sensitive or upsetting. This is a book ban, and it is harmful.
As a child, I portrayed Huck Finn on stage. On other occasions, I played Jewish and French children dealing with discrimination. I am convinced we need to see and know the past as it was to understand the progress we’ve made. We also need to know the past to recognize what our ancestors had to accomplish for us to be here. We can’t have stomachs too weak to view the past. This kind of book ban is unfortunate.
From ages eight to fourteen, I spent a lot of time in the central Enoch Pratt Library building in downtown Baltimore. It was massive, with many rooms. I assume some places had the kind of books I would call X-rated later in my life. I never encountered those books back then.
I would enter the main entrance and turn to the right to the Young Adult section. There was a massive collection of sports, science fiction, humor, and other things. It kept me busy. I don’t know if they were in that section, but I also found serious histories of World War II and Nazi Germany. I did not feel deprived.
The librarians managed to allot various kinds of materials to the different places in the building for multiple audiences. No one complained of banning. You could pick the material you wanted by walking to the appropriate room.
“Ban” has become a popular word in the fights over appropriate content for elementary school libraries. It is being used to try to keep certain materials in elementary school libraries. But this is very different. Parents expect these libraries to be safe for their children. Frankly, they expect them to contain information about standard age-appropriate information. That includes many fields, including the hard sciences and the social sciences.
They don’t expect to have any material that can’t be read aloud at a school board meeting. If the material is too raunchy for adults, it is inappropriate for an elementary school library. The job of the school librarian is to inform, not to indoctrinate. If parents can’t check the contents of their child’s school library, something is very wrong.
If this material is aimed at children, its purpose is questionable. If it is aimed at adults, put it in an adult part of another library. Those who insist on keeping this material in primary school libraries are making the case for school choice, smaller public school budgets, and the end of the U. S. Department of Education.